BF2S Forums Talk About Irony.

Pug wrote:

lowing wrote:

Pug wrote:

You are interesting...

...you hate welfare because it's part of the tax you pay, yet when someone shows you how a personal choice will result in more money out of your pocket you ignore it.

not a simple as that Pug. I hate welfare because the recipients contribute nothing to receive it. Health care is just that, and I am willing to pay whatever "extra" costs there is to maintain it, if it keeps us from being dictated to by others as to how to live our lives.

As I said, we could take the argument that you are making to the ends of the earth. We then could argue against skydiving, sports, hiking, hell we could argue against walking across the street. You gotta live your life in such a way that ensures you never get hurt. It is a ridiculous argument.

I'm not really interested in paying the extra cost of someone who can't get a fucking job, which for some, is just like not wearing a fucking helmet.

Yes lowing, it is that simple

Ok lets argue it then. I will also assume you support banning skydiving or race car driving, or scuba diving, because you are not interested in paying extra when they get hurt either?

Jaekus wrote:

Sky diving and racing have public liability insurance, afaik.

you don't think bikers carry liability insurance? Hell that is the LEAST they have to carry. So now what?

if i have to wear a seatbelt then those fuckers have to wear a helmet

Jaekus wrote:

So you are saying bikers shouldn't wear helmets?
Would you wear a helmet?

Nope not what I said, I said thy should not be dictated by govt. to wear a helmet.

Then don't.

every time somebody puts his buns in the drivers sit he assumes a position of increased danger not only to himself, but to those around him as well, and thus must take reasonable precautions. in the biker's case this is even more true, because he's not sitting inside a tin can which protects those who drive most other vehicles from rocks, bugs, birds, weather and many other things which could interfere with them driving.

and if enforcing reasonable rules protecting people from careless and irresponsible assholes in drivers sits is not a government's job, then i don't know what is.

Last edited by Shahter (2011-07-06 22:34:28)

ffs, AR

lowing wrote:

11 Bravo wrote:

if i have to wear a seatbelt then those fuckers have to wear a helmet

You shouldn't have to wear a seatbelt either.

my bad.

Lowing you should really look up the mortality rates of wearing a seatbelt as opposed to not. You'd be surprised, but they actually test for this kind of thing. Using "crash test dummies". Sounds funny I know! But it turns out that guy in the backset can go straight through a windscreen and onto the road, causing a mess for other motorists. But personal freedoms should be respected because belts are really uncomfy and restrict one's ability to die in a horrific accident and kill others in the process.

Darwin. Grin.

Shahter wrote:

every time somebody puts his buns in the drivers sit he assumes a position of increased danger not only to himself, but to those around him as well, and thus must take reasonable precautions. in the biker's case this is even more true, because he's not sitting inside a tin can which protects those who drive most other vehicles from rocks, bugs, birds, weather and many other things which could interfere with them driving.

and if enforcing reasonable rules protecting people from careless and irresponsible assholes in drivers sits is not a government's job, then i don't know what is.

How is a person flying out of a car on a roll over endangering public safety? Honestly how many other drivers in this world have been killed from SOMEONE ELSE NOT wearing their seatbelt?

I think the argument is usually that if a community has limited emt resources, those paramedics could be helping people who actually took steps to protect themselves rather than those careless individuals.

AussieReaper wrote:

my bad.

Lowing you should really look up the mortality rates of wearing a seatbelt as opposed to not. You'd be surprised, but they actually test for this kind of thing. Using "crash test dummies". Sounds funny I know! But it turns out that guy in the backset can go straight through a windscreen and onto the road, causing a mess for other motorists. But personal freedoms should be respected because belts are really uncomfy and restrict one's ability to die in a horrific accident and kill others in the process.

How many people die from smoking? and yet the laws are written to protect those that do not smoke? Why is that? It is not the govts. job to protect us from ourselves it is the job of govt. to ensure our freedoms. I know you are a big fan of the nanny state, but I am not. What people do to themselves is really none of my concern.

Last edited by lowing (2011-07-07 02:37:02)

Shahter wrote:

lowing wrote:

Shahter wrote:

every time somebody puts his buns in the drivers sit he assumes a position of increased danger not only to himself, but to those around him as well, and thus must take reasonable precautions. in the biker's case this is even more true, because he's not sitting inside a tin can which protects those who drive most other vehicles from rocks, bugs, birds, weather and many other things which could interfere with them driving.

and if enforcing reasonable rules protecting people from careless and irresponsible assholes in drivers sits is not a government's job, then i don't know what is.

How is a person flying out of a car on a roll over endangering public safety?

he isn't. i wasn't replying to seatbelt point, but rather the OP and the whole helmet discussion.

edit: you know, by remaining alive in a car accident that person would possibly be able to make himself useful by calling an ambulance and administering basic first aid. but, in this thread about "liberty, freedom, pursuit of happiness, and evil government" this petty sentiment has no place, probably.

Always plenty of rubberneckers standing around to do that. Besides odds are the accident happened when they were on the cell phone thus the phone is probably no longer in reach anyway even if it did still work.